SG's BITCHIN' ABOUT JAX

[mister bacon]

Detroit was awarded the Super Bowl by the NFL as part of Detroits deal to get Ford Field built. I don't think it will be all that bad, it might suck for practices.. and bad weather during the week there might make things difficult, although I remember people saying good things about Minnesota which had the same issues.

[Tecmo Bo]

If Foxboro was closer to Boston they could certainly host a SB, roof or no (the best football is cold weather football).

[Frank the Tank]

Weather does matter to the NFL or FedEx Field would've gotten a Super Bowl by now. I think it would be kind of neat to have the team with the better record have the opportunity to play the game at the neutral site of their choice so that they can have the climate advantage. I think a Super Bowl in Green Bay would be awesome. There are several reasons that'll never happen of course, but the main one is that the NFL marketing machine doesn't want to put that kind of game on the air. Tagliabue and company considered giving the 2007 Super Bowl to either New York or Washington DC as a way of injecting money into those cities after 9/11 but both were ruled out because of climate. Cold weather football is great for diehard fans, but there will not be an outdoor cold weather Super Bowl under current NFL management. No chance at all.

[Adam Carolla]

After all the NFL has done for New England football, they don't exactly owe them any favors, either. The communites of Houston and Jacksonville did a lot more of the financing for their stadiums than Massachusettes did.

[Adam Carolla]

Along the same lines, we haven't seen SuperBowls planned for St. Louis or Nashville, either. Stealing teams from established markets doesn't seem to be something the NFL has to reward - even if the public is paying for it.

[friskysman]

I think the team with the best record ought to host the Super Bowl, period. I have always thought the practice of playing the Super Bowl in a warm weather city or under a dome was pretty girlie, for lack of a better term. Football is MEANT to be played in the cold. If it wasn't, the season would be held in the spring or summer, not the dead of fall/winter. And I don't really care about the experience of Super Bowl Week. I've always thought that was overrated. What percentage of fans even get to experience that? The important part should be the game, and a huge part of football is homefield advantage. The NFL will still get its money and the game will be a heck of a lot more interesting to watch. Of course it will never happen, but it should.

[Tecmo Bo]

The team with the best record can't host the Superbowl. Not because they shouldn't, but because it would be a logistical catastrophe, and I mean CATASTROPHE. Jacksonville could hardly get ready for the Superbowl with 2 years to prepare, can you imagine if they had two weeks? Not even two weeks, it would be more like one week. Hell, if that were the case and the Pats hosted a Superbowl, I would flee Boston for that week.

[friskysman]

The team with the best record can't host the Superbowl. Not because they shouldn't, but because it would be a logistical catastrophe, and I mean CATASTROPHE. Jacksonville could hardly get ready for the Superbowl with 2 years to prepare, can you imagine if they had two weeks? Not even two weeks, it would be more like one week. Hell, if that were the case and the Pats hosted a Superbowl, I would flee Boston for that week.

How then can two random cities host the World Series or NBA Championships? I understand there isn't nearly the hoopla for those seven game series that there is for a Super Bowl, but who cares? As I said, the Super Bowl is about a game, not Super Bowl Week and a bunch of parties. If a smaller town ended up hosting the Super Bowl, people would just have to deal with it. I don't care about people having fun during Super Bowl Week. I care about the integrity of the game, and allowing homefield advantage to play a part in the biggest game of the year seems pretty reasonable.

[mister bacon]

How then can two random cities host the World Series or NBA Championships? I understand there isn't nearly the hoopla for those seven game series that there is for a Super Bowl, but who cares? As I said, the Super Bowl is about a game, not Super Bowl Week and a bunch of parties. If a smaller town ended up hosting the Super Bowl, people would just have to deal with it. I don't care about people having fun during Super Bowl Week. I care about the integrity of the game, and allowing homefield advantage to play a part in the biggest game of the year seems pretty reasonable.

A lot less people cover the NBA championships, and a lot less people go to those games as events.

[Frank the Tank]

It could be held at the home team's stadium if it were made a lot more like a "regular game". That means giving the season ticket holders priority (so less attendees need hotel rooms) and not making so many seats available to the visiting team and the media. I, personally, would love it if they went this route, but at the same time I can understand how much money they'd be giving up and realize there's no chance it'd ever happen.

[Tecmo Bo]

NBA and MLB title series are spread out of 7 games and that's after 2 or three rounds of playofs before that. While there is a euphoria around it, there is also a sense of exhaustion associated with it as well. No baseball or NBA arena can come close to holding 70,000 fans. Most years, no NBA or MLB playoff game approaches the worldwide coverage that a Superbowl does, not even close. Hosting a SB is more like hosting the Olympics than it is like holding an NBA or MLB playoff.
You want the SB to be more like the MLB or NBA playoffs? I love baseball, I'm a baseball guy. But under no condition whatsoever should the NFL, which puts out the best sports product in the world, EVER try to be more like the NBA or MLB (both of which put out some highly questionable sports products). To even suggest it is beyond ludicrous.

[Frank the Tank]

I share your opinion that the NFL is definitely the best run of the four (three?) major sports leagues in North America. However that does not mean that Super Bowl week is by any means perfect, and I certainly don't think that it's the NFL's best product. The hoopla in the host city exists solely to give the league's corporate partners a large number of affluent consumers so these companies can have a high profile marketing blitz. That's not at all stupid of the NFL since it makes a lot of money, but as a fan I don't think it adds value to my enjoyment of the game. Moving the Super Bowl to the best team's stadium will never happen for the financial reasons cited, but that doesn't mean it would weaken the product if it happened.

[friskysman]

You hit the nail on the head Frank. The Super Bowl as it is now is really not all that exciting. It gets hyped like crazy every year, but clearly it ends up being a bust more often than not. Staging the event at the best team's stadium is one of the chief ways I can think of to make the game more enjoyable for the average fan. I understand it makes no sense for the money-makers involved and will never happen, but it's fun to dream.

[Tecmo Bo]

Hey frisky, you want to expound on why it would make it better for the average fan? The 'average fan' watches the Superbowl at home. When it comes to game time, I don't give a rats ass whre they're playing, though no Superbowl (nor any athletic event for that matter) should ever, ever be played on artificial turf.
If the Superbowl isn't the NFL's best product, then what is? Honestly, what percentage of games in a given season are great games? Blowouts happen, duds happen. You should appreciate each game for what it is. If it's highscoring, great, enjoy the fireworks! If it's a tight game, enjoy the tension. If it's a defensive war, appreciate the value of each yard lost or gained. If it's a blowout, then sit back and relax and enjoy seeing a few spectacular plays. You'er sitting on a couch somewhere with your best buddies or family, spending the day drinking, eating nachos and buffalo wings and watching/talking football? HOW can that ever not be great?
And if all else fails, there's always the commercials.

If you really want more great games in the SB though, then start rooting for the pats, they've made their last two games to really remember.

[Frank the Tank]

If the Superbowl isn't the NFL's best product, then what is?

I didn't say the Super Bowl wasn't their best product, I said Super Bowl week wasn't their best product. It's a key distinction. I think the hype before the actual game adds little to no value to the average fan, and the advertising promotions going on in Jacksonville are worthless to anyone except the NFL owners who profit and the companies that promote their products. If Media Day and all these other events this week went away who would care except the reporting crowd and some of the other VIP's who get shuttled from place to place?